VISHNU NAMDEO DARADE AND OTHERS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — ABA/589/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 05th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030138712026
Filing Number
ABA/3471/2026
Filing Date
07-Apr-2026
Registration No
ABA/589/2026
Registration Date
07-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. Pathan
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. Pathan
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
05-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 14-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.VISHNU NAMDEO DARADE AND OTHERS
Adv. S R SAPKAL,Amit Shivlal Gadekar,Amit Shivlal Gadekar, ,Yash Anil Jadhav,Amit Shivlal Gadekar
-
2.ANKUSH VISHNU DARADE
-
3.LAHU VISHNU DARADE
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Adv. P.P. FOR R/SOLE 1123
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. PathanView PDF
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) rejected the anticipatory bail application of three applicants charged with abetment of suicide and wrongful confinement. The court found that witness statements, postmortem evidence showing ante-mortem injuries, and investigation material prima facie established the applicants' involvement in wrongfully restraining and assaulting the deceased, leading to his suicide. Custodial interrogation was deemed necessary for comprehensive investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Apr-2026
Anticipatory Bail- After Notice
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. Pathan
-
27-Apr-2026
Anticipatory Bail- After Notice
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. Pathan
-
22-Apr-2026
—
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. Pathan
-
16-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Mehroz K. PathanView PDF
-
16-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. ABA/589/2026
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) rejected the anticipatory bail application of three applicants charged with abetment of suicide and wrongful confinement. The court found that witness statements, postmortem evidence showing ante-mortem injuries, and investigation material prima facie established the applicants' involvement in wrongfully restraining and assaulting the deceased, leading to his suicide. Custodial interrogation was deemed necessary for comprehensive investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts